This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: SRA bit-field optimization
- From: Richard Sandiford <rsandifo at nildram dot co dot uk>
- To: "John David Anglin" <dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca>
- Cc: aoliva at redhat dot com, richard dot guenther at gmail dot com, zippel at linux-m68k dot org, bernds_cb1 at t-online dot de, dnovillo at acm dot org, dberlin at dberlin dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, pinskia at gmail dot com, ebotcazou at adacore dot com
- Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2007 23:11:58 +0100
- Subject: Re: SRA bit-field optimization
- References: <200710062105.l96L5d05013819@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca>
"John David Anglin" <email@example.com> writes:
>> Alexandre Oliva <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>> > Anyhow, this patch, that supersedes the previous, fixes it, and with
>> > it the testcase appears to yield the correct result.
>> Thanks, the results after this patch are much better. As you say,
>> 20000113-1.c is well and truly fixed. The only remaining C regressions are:
>> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/991118-1.c compilation, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer (internal compiler error)
>> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/991118-1.c compilation, -O3 -g (internal compiler error)
>> Don't worry about the 991118-1.c failure. It's an RTL ICE, and probably
>> a config/mips bug. I'll have a look at it.
> I'm also still seeing the failure of 991118-1.c.
Ah, thanks. I did have a quick look at it, and it seemed to be caused
by a missing conversion at the tree level. Expand was being given
a BIT_AND_EXPR with a DImode-typed result and HImode-typed operand.
I didn't try to track down where it was coming from. So it does seem
to be a tree-level bug after all.